Elections Kamala Harris for POTUS

[Rod1]

I'd imagine you'd think that while maybe not ANY means are acceptable to stop him...most are?

Catch-22, you can't break democracy to save democracy.

Institutions failed to hold him accountable because of partisanship so at this point the only legitimate way to defeat him without breaking the country is via elections, otherwise you are fucked.

 

[skysolo]

I'm so Black, you guys. Look at all of these Black musicians who I learned existed today.

I can't wait to show you my hot sauce collection.

 

[spamking]

Cool story. Tell that to the other red states that don't even have medical cannabis legal yet lmao.

Huh? I provided an example of a pretty conservative red state that didn't have the issues you mentioned.

Why would I care what other red states do with weed?

But let me guess, you're gonna say Kamala put all these people in jail for laws she didn't write but Trump supporting red states putting people in jail for weed don't count lol.

No. I didn't say that. Do you need me to say it so you can feel like you made a point?

This is where Republicans have a major talking point issue.

The major talking point issue you just made up to try and prove a point?

Are Republicans the party of law and order? If so, why are they raising issue with a DA doing her job? You want to attack Kamala for putting people in jail for weed, then why are all these red states still putting people in jail for weed?

Talk about reframing a comment to try and push an alternative idea. DA's refuse to prosecute people for weed-related offenses quite often. And even when they are charged and prosecuted it often results in no jail time. I don't think anyone is "attacking" her for following the law.

I can only speak for what happens in Oklahoma. While medical weed is legal here, growers must be licensed. Those being put in jail for weed are growing illegally.

This is like watching a looney tunes character light up a cigar that everyone knows will blow up in their face.

What does this have to do with the comment you're responding to?

 

[Fedor>Cain]

Huh? I provided an example of a pretty conservative red state that didn't have the issues you mentioned.

Why would I care what other red states do with weed?


No. I didn't say that. Do you need me to say it so you can feel like you made a point?

The major talking point issue you just made up to try and prove a point?

Talk about reframing a comment to try and push an alternative idea. DA's refuse to prosecute people for weed-related offenses quite often. And even when they are charged and prosecuted it often results in no jail time. I don't think anyone is "attacking" her for following the law.

I can only speak for what happens in Oklahoma. While medical weed is legal here, growers must be licensed. Those being put in jail for weed are growing illegally.

What does this have to do with the comment you're responding to?

Because you think 1 state erases all of the Republican issues with weed lol.

You do not seem to grasp that Republicans DO NOT want to draw attention to the weed issue. It is toxic as fuck for them.

 

[spamking]

I'm so Black, you guys. Look at all of these Black musicians who I learned existed today.

I can't wait to show you my hot sauce collection.

Would've been hilarious if she had bought something from Clarence Carter.

 

[spamking]

Because you think 1 state erases all of the Republican issues with weed lol.

You do not seem to grasp that Republicans DO NOT want to draw attention to the weed issue. It is toxic as fuck for them.

No. That's not what I said or what I think. That's your misinterpretation of what I said.

I said if Oklahoma can do it so can all of these red states you're proclaiming to have an issue with doing so.

Why is the weed issue so toxic to Republicans? If it's so "toxic" how in the world did we get medical weed legalized in Oklahoma? Do you think no Republicans voted in favor of it?

 

[Fedor>Cain]

No. That's not what I said or what I think. That's your misinterpretation of what I said.

I said if Oklahoma can do it so can all of these red states you're proclaiming to have an issue with doing so.

Why is the weed issue so toxic to Republicans? If it's so "toxic" how in the world did we get medical weed legalized in Oklahoma? Do you think no Republicans voted in favor of it?

So do you think all of the red states can do it before November?

If not, your point is nonsensical because they are currently putting people in jail for weed as I type this lol

 

[Joe]

This is very amusing. A group of haley voters formed a group for kamala and haley wants them to go away

 

[mkess101]

No not any means because unlike Trump and his followers I think preserving our democratic norms is really important which means that sometimes there are lines you don't cross even if there are no official rules telling you you can't cross that line.

Its not though because its based in reality. Trump really did try to steal the election, Congressional Republicans really did acquit him during impeachment, and the SCOTUS did in fact give him expansive criminal immunity. That is very much unlike his claims of election fraud which are completely baseless.

And if we did it would be Trump's fault.

Okay, so you're not an "ends justify the means" guy. (Which imo is good, I agree).

But the "if we did, it would be Trump's fault" line...you're saying ONLY Trump's fault?

I'd agree agree he has some culpability but if we get language like "He's Hitler, he will end democracy, he must be stopped" leading up to the election...and then he wins...and then we see some on the left lose their shit and have their own version of Jan 6th...that's ALL on Trump because..."he started it"?

That seems absurd.

Let's say you and I live in the same neighborhood and you whip up half the neighborhood into a frenzy against me because I don't keep my yard looking nice. Some of them go way too far and destroy some of my property etc. So in turn, I whip up the other half in a frenzy against you for being evil and bringing that down on me. And they vandalize your car and house--that's just all your fault for starting it? Myself and the idiots that got amped because of what I said have no blame? Only you and those who initially did wrong?

Or you're saying Trump would share the blame?

 

[Fedor>Cain]

This is very amusing. A group of haley voters formed a group for kamala and haley wants them to go away

Hate to break it to Haley, but the only way that's shutting down is if the people who run it decide to do it. She's got no ground to stand on.

 

[spamking]

So do you think all of the red states can do it before November?

I doubt they can all do it before November 2025 let alone this year. Do they need to?

If not, your point is nonsensical because they are currently putting people in jail for weed as I type this lol

MY point is nonsensical? Pffft. People have been getting put in jail for weed for longer than you've been alive.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

I doubt they can all do it before November 2025 let alone this year. Do they need to?

MY point is nonsensical? Pffft. People have been getting put in jail for weed for longer than you've been alive.

Well, if they're gonna rag on Kamala for weed policies that she didn't even write, then one would assume they'd need to get rid of their own abhorrent weed laws if they want to hammer her on it before the election, no?

 

[spamking]

Well, if they're gonna rag on Kamala for weed policies that she didn't even write, then one would assume they'd need to get rid of their own abhorrent weed laws if they want to hammer her on it before the election, no?

No.

They're not hammering her about enforcing the law. They're hammering her because they heard what Tulsi Gabbard said and an interview Kamala did and see her as being hypocritical when it comes to weed laws. She seems to be wishy-washy and go with the flow when it's convenient and based on who she's talking to and wants to influence. I think that's why you feel she's being hammered.

 

[mkess101]

Catch-22, you can't break democracy to save democracy.

Institutions failed to hold him accountable because of partisanship so at this point the only legitimate way to defeat him without breaking the country is via elections, otherwise you are fucked.

I agree completely. I just hope that IF he wins, that's the viewpoint still held by everyone. Otherwise we WILL have another shitshow.

 

[Anewt]

Well, if they're gonna rag on Kamala for weed policies that she didn't even write, then one would assume they'd need to get rid of their own abhorrent weed laws if they want to hammer her on it before the election, no?

It's not just the weed tho. It's the fact she openly desired more people in jails to maintain the " labour " for the jails and utilised weed for that goal.



Plus the giggle and attitude she had more so than doing her job.


It's one thing to do your job.

It's another to turn around years afterwards and laugh about ruining lives for profit and acknowledge your hypocrisy with a odd laugh.

 

[Islam Imamate]

Okay, so you're not an "ends justify the means" guy. (Which imo is good, I agree).

But the "if we did, it would be Trump's fault" line...you're saying ONLY Trump's fault?

I'd agree agree he has some culpability but if we get language like "He's Hitler, he will end democracy, he must be stopped" leading up to the election...and then he wins...and then we see some on the left lose their shit and have their own version of Jan 6th...that's ALL on Trump because..."he started it"?

That seems absurd.

Let's say you and I live in the same neighborhood and you whip up half the neighborhood into a frenzy against me because I don't keep my yard looking nice. Some of them go way too far and destroy some of my property etc. So in turn, I whip up the other half in a frenzy against you for being evil and bringing that down on me. And they vandalize your car and house--that's just all your fault for starting it? Myself and the idiots that got amped because of what I said have no blame? Only you and those who initially did wrong?

Or you're saying Trump would share the blame?

Obviously individuals and groups are responsible for their own actions so if someone tried to assassinate Trump or overturn a free and fair election that's on them(though because of the SCOTUS immunity decision Biden could try to do so and be criminally immune). But in regards to the polarization and plummeting faith in our democratic institutions and norms that is largely at the feet of Trump and his cronies. I don't like the Hitler comparison because they're lazy and hyperbolic but its absolutely the case that Trump threatens our democratic way of life and pointing that out is not the issue, its the fact that he is in fact a threat that is the issue.

 

[Fedor>Cain]

No.

They're not hammering her about enforcing the law. They're hammering her because they heard what Tulsi Gabbard said and an interview Kamala did and see her as being hypocritical when it comes to weed laws. She seems to be wishy-washy and go with the flow when it's convenient and based on who she's talking to and wants to influence. I think that's why you feel she's being hammered.

I don't feel she's being hammered about weed and she won't be hammered about weed.

You don't seem to follow the logic. Weed isn't a good talking point for Republicans because they've fought so long to keep it away. And because many red states still have shit weed laws.

They will most certainly avoid this topic as it draws negative political attention to themselves due to many red states still having shit laws. Hence, weed is a "toxic" issue for them.

 

[mkess101]

Obviously individuals and groups are responsible for their own actions so if someone tried to assassinate or overturn a free and fair Trump that's on them(though because of the SCOTUS immunity decision Biden could try to do so and remain criminally immune). But in regards to the polarization and plummeting faith in our democratic institutions and norms that is largely at the feet of Trump and his cronies. I don't like the Hitler comparison because its lazy and hyperbolic but its absolutely the case that Trump threatens our democratic way of life and pointing that out is not the issue, its the fact that he is in fact a threat that is the issue.

I think the lack of faith in institutions yes, I agree mostly. Especially specific to the electoral process. The polarization...imo that IS more of a "both sides" thing. The rhetoric is absurd by nearly EVERYONE. I think Trump was the catalyst in some ways yes but it didn't take much for his opponents to run with it and in some cases go even further.

 

[spamking]

Focusing on what matters . . .

 

[Islam Imamate]

I agree completely. I just hope that IF he wins, that's the viewpoint still held by everyone. Otherwise we WILL have another shitshow.

We know that if he loses Trump certainly won't.

I think the lack of faith in institutions yes, I agree mostly. Especially specific to the electoral process. The polarization...imo that IS more of a "both sides" thing. The rhetoric is absurd by nearly EVERYONE. I think Trump was the catalyst in some ways yes but it didn't take much for his opponents to run with it and in some cases go even further.

No its not both sides because not all rhetoric is equally polarizing or destructive. I don't think that conservatives calling Democrats baby killers or queers or calling someone like me a terrorist is even the problem. The election denial is the core rhetorical issue that has deeply polarized the nation. We can all each other all sorts of names but at the end of the day if we can accept free and fair elections we can just run it back again four years later. But if we can't accept electoral losses and indeed endeavor to overturn them the system starts to breakdown.